Patna High Court
Sabir Mallick @ Md. SabirversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that the existence of an allegation against the petitioner precludes the grant of anticipatory bail at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sabir, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Sections 75 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act alleging that he attempted to outrage the modesty of the informant, Shania Perween. The informant claimed the petitioner entered her home and tried to commit an indecent act, but the petitioner’s counsel argued that the informant’s family are butchers, that the allegation is false, and that the petitioner has no criminal record and a grown‑up child. The State counsel and the informant’s lawyer maintained that the FIR clearly shows an attempt to outrage modesty. The court observed that an allegation exists against the petitioner and that the matter can be considered later during a bail application, finding no merit in granting anticipatory bail at this stage. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected, with a direction that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, the bail matter should be decided promptly.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the applicable provisions of the B.N.S. and POCSO Act.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- POCSO
- sexual assault
- false allegation
- bail application
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68403 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-442 Year-2025 Thana- HISUWA District- Nawada
======================================================
Sabir Mallick @ Md. Sabir S/o- Late Maslehuddin Resident of Village- Sihin
PS-Hisua, Dist- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shania Perween D/o- Reyaz Quraishi R/o- Shihin Ps- Hisua Dist- Nawada
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. A. Shamsi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. N. A. Shamsi, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned counsel
representing the informant beside Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh,
learned State counsel.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Hisua P.S. Case No. 442 of 2025 instituted under Sections
75 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. alongwith sections 8/12 of POCSO
Act lodged on 28.07.2025 by the informant,Shania Perween.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that while she was at home, the petitioner came and tried to
outrage her modesty. When the family members came and
raised alarm, the petitioner escaped, dial 112 was called. This
followed the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68403 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
families of the informant are butcher and used to sell meat from
the house itself. It was objected by the petitioner’s side which
followed this FIR. Learned counsel further submits that the
petitioner has a grown up child and cannot indulge in such act.
5. Learned counsel for the informant as also learned
APP jointly opposes the prayer submitting that a bare perusal of
the FIR would show that the petitioner despite being married,
moved beyond indecency and tried to outrage her modesty. It
was only because of the timely presence of the family members
that she could be saved.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
families of the informant have realised the false allegation and
they have also put in their respective affidavits to this effect.
The petitioner do not have criminal antecedent.
7. Having heard the parties, this Court is of the
opinion that an allegation is there against the petitioner. The
developments that have taken place can be taken up at the time
of bail application.
8. With the aforesaid observation, finding no merit in
the present case, the anticipatory bail application stands
rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68403 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
09. If the petitioner surrenders within a period of four
weeks and seek bail, the Court concerned shall take up the
matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…